-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Reporting a client the TE Topology profile a server has implemented #161
Comments
Triggered some discussion in Netmod WG: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/8wsAyGazqi7KqgFHz9VK-7vuzHc/ This seems an issue to be addressed by TEAS |
2021-09-10 TE Call
Client can write the network-te-profile to request the server to implement only some profiles for a given topology instance Server report in the network-te-profile which profile has been implemented by a given topology instance Client can write supported-te-profiles to request the server which profile implemented by the server should be used Server reports in the supported-te-profiles the profiles it has implemented (e.g., uni, status, geolocation) Client can request the server to implement a sub-set of its supported profiles (e.g., uni, status):
Server capability: A, B, C, D Client 1: A, B operational-DS: union (A, B, C, D) rpc get-profile-topology
Should we find a generic solution which can be used with other models (e.g., te-tunnel) or different similar solutions for te-topology and te-tunnel model? The plan is to progress this issue before requesting WG adoption |
2021-10-08 TE Call
Server reports the profiles it has implemented (e.g., uni, status, geolocation):
For example, the server can report that it can support the following profiles:
Client can request the server to implement a sub-set of its supported profiles (e.g., uni, status):
For example, the server can report that it can support the following profiles:
Client 1 can only set the leaves in common between profiles A and B in the running DS and only ready leaves in common between profiles A and B in both running and operational DSes. Client 2 can only set the leaves in common between profiles B and C in the running DS and only ready leaves in common between profiles B and C in both running and operational DSes. This information can be available as read-only in the operational DS (similar mechanism as YANG notification subscription) Not requesting a request-network-profile RPC or requesting a request-network-profile RPC with an empty list is equivalent as requesting all the profiles being supported by the server. |
The profile of the TE topology should also take into account the optional attributes defined in the technology-specific augmentation models. See for example: ietf-ccamp-wg/draft-ietf-ccamp-optical-impairment-topology-yang#92 |
It is not clear how it is possible to report to a client the TE topology profiles that a server has implemented
How to avoid the client to write an attribute not used in the TE Topology profile implemented by the server
Is it a general issue?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: